Weapons of Moderate Destruction stolen :: Free Realms

Quote Reply

#1 Oct 25 2004 at 10:15 PM Rating: Excellent

trickybeck

Tracer Bullet

12,636 posts

U.N.: 400 Tons of Iraq Explosives Missing

Quote:

VIENNA, Austria - The U.N. nuclear agency warned Monday that insurgents in Iraq may have obtained nearly 400 tons of missing explosives that can be used in the kind of car bomb attacks that have targeted U.S.-led coalition forces for months.

nternational Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei reported the disappearance to the U.N. Security Council on Monday, two weeks after he said Iraq told the nuclear agency that the explosives had vanished from the former Iraqi military installation as a result of "theft and looting ... due to lack of security."

The disappearance raised questions about why the United States didn't do more to secure the Al-Qaqaa facility 30 miles south of Baghdad and failed to allow full international inspections to resume after the March 2003 invasion.

Quote:

McClellan said the IAEA informed U.S. mission in Vienna on Oct. 15 about the missing explosives at Al-Qaqaa. He said national security adviser Condoleeza Rice was notified "days after that," and she then informed President Bush.

Guess they weren't concerned, I mean, NOT THAT concerned:

Quote:

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the administration's first concern was whether the disappearance constituted a nuclear proliferation threat. He said it did not.

And some people still believe a vote for Kerry is a threat to national security. Smiley: disappointed

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#2 Oct 25 2004 at 10:20 PM Rating: Good

bodhisattva

Drama Nerdvana

20,674 posts

But only Bush has the Integrity and the Resolve to see us through this horrible horrible situation that he got us into.

Edited, Mon Oct 25 23:28:08 2004 by bhodisattva

____________________________

Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#3 Oct 25 2004 at 10:31 PM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1592260535209

Sage

4,285 posts

OMG! this only proves that we MUST elect Bush again, to protect us from the potential terrorist attack that could be caused by the missing WMDs! Kerry will just ignore that they are missing, but Bush is already looking for them. When he does, it'll prove that WMDs exist in Iraq!

Varus

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#4 Oct 25 2004 at 10:34 PM Rating: Good

bodhisattva

Drama Nerdvana

20,674 posts

In further news thanks to the lack of common sense of the Bush administration and the fact that they didnt secure bomb material expect to see car bombings to increase exponentially in Iraq.

____________________________

Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#5 Oct 26 2004 at 12:00 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1592761477253

Scholar

188 posts

I'm starting to believe that they are doin this **** on purpose in order to escalate the war. So long as the right successfully paints the left as weak, death and destruction suit their purposes.

How many times have you heard some wingnut imply that to criticize the commander-in-chief IN A TIME OF WAR is treasonous or unamerican?

These people deserve prison for criminal negligence.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#6 Oct 26 2004 at 12:21 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1591812084161

281 posts

Yeah, we are MUCH SAFER with Bush in office,... <sarcasm>

get a clue people,.. Iraq is a big pile of doo-doo. It stinks. What I really want to know, how many people that live there actually believe we are helping them,.. I don't trust either the left or right to give me a unbias opinion about this. If this crap was happening in America,.. well, I would hate the people responsible for holding those explosives cause they obviously F***ed something up.

We're suppose to protect them, we're not doing a good job when **** like this happens,..

YAY! support Bush! blah

Bush needs to read the words in the bible again. Calls himself a christian,.. blasphemy. pure ignorant redneck.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#7 Oct 26 2004 at 1:42 AM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1592260466430

Scholar

811 posts

Not as if you can really expect the US government to really have a handle on things in Iraq considering there weren't really detailed plans put in place for what was to happen to secure things and things have seemed to just gone to hell in a handbasket that will probably be going to a picnic where the ants will blow it up causing some people to get upset and steal some more bomb material to blow up the ants then creating a bunch of craters people will fall into and break their skulls causing people to start hearing how some people's broken skulls are killing them.

Then we'll start hearing of people trying to remove the skulls of people so as to save them from being killed by a broken skull and start having news shows doing bits on the "War on the Skulls". Then we'll probably get barraged with spam and junk mail asking us to donate to the "Dollars for Skull-Lessness" and whatnot.

Damn Bush.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#8 Oct 26 2004 at 3:49 AM Rating: Good

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

You know what's really interesting about this? That the NY Times decided to "break a story" about explosives that had been missing for almost a year and a half just weeks before the election.

Read the *whole* story. This is "big news" only because the Times chose to write a story about it a couple weeks ago. The relevant part is this:

Quote:

The letter from Abbas informed the IAEA that since April 9, 2003, looting at the Al-Qaqaa installation had resulted in the loss of 215 tons of HMX, 156 tons of RDX and six tons of PETN explosives.

In other words, in all probability, that place was looted before US troops ever got there, much less had any opportunity to secure it. They just only recently got a full accounting of what all was stolen. The lack of guards at the building when the reporters drove by (and provide a nice picture as well!) is almost certainly because there has never been anything there to guard since we occupied the area.

Funny how the story makes it seem like this stuff was stolen just this month while US forces should have been guarding it. Sigh... No liberal slant in media you say?

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#9 Oct 26 2004 at 4:41 AM Rating: Good

bodhisattva

Drama Nerdvana

20,674 posts

Well the report by the IAEA to the United Nations just came out in October so that is a good reason for reporting on it. Also the al Qaqaa facility has been under United States control since the War and has still been repeatedly looted.

So please dont use the Liberal Media defense when they report on one of the many times the Bush Administration has messed up.

____________________________

Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#10 Oct 26 2004 at 5:19 AM Rating: Good

Nadenu

Gurue

16,299 posts

Saudi Arabia has the WMD now, so... let's invade Turkey!

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#11 Oct 26 2004 at 5:22 AM Rating: Good

bodhisattva

Drama Nerdvana

20,674 posts

Mistress Nadenu wrote:

Saudi Arabia has the WMD now, so... let's invade Turkey!

Sounds good but only if you gather a coalition that includes Luxembourg, East Timor, the Falkland Islands and the magical land of Rand McNally.

____________________________

Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#12 Oct 26 2004 at 5:49 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1592791858947

Sage

2,878 posts

Quote:

NBCNEWS reported: The 380 tons of powerful conventional explosives were already missing back in April 10, 2003 -- when U.S. troops arrived at the installation south of Baghdad!

An NBCNEWS crew embedded with troops moved in to secure the Al-Qaqaa weapons facility on April 10, 2003, one day after the liberation of Iraq.

According to NBCNEWS, the HMX and RDX explosives were already missing when the American troops arrived.

"The U.S. Army was at the site one day after the liberation and the weapons were already gone," a top Republican blasted from Washington late Monday.

The International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors last saw the explosives in January 2003 when they took an inventory and placed fresh seals on the bunkers.

Dem vp hopeful John Edwards blasted Bush for not securing the explosives: "It is reckless and irresponsible to fail to protect and safeguard one of the largest weapons sites in the country. And by either ignoring these mistakes or being clueless about them, George Bush has failed. He has failed as our commander in chief; he has failed as president."

A senior Bush official e-mailed DRUDGE late Monday: "Let me get this straight, are Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards now saying we did not go into Iraq soon enough? We should have invaded and liberated Iraq sooner?"

Top Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart fired back Monday night: "In a shameless attempt to cover up its failure to secure 380 tons of highly explosive material in Iraq, the White House is desperately flailing in an effort to escape blame. Instead of distorting John Kerry’s words, the Bush campaign is now falsely and deliberately twisting the reports of journalists. It is the latest pathetic excuse from an administration that never admits a mistake, no matter how disastrous."

Why is the U.N. nuclear agency suddenly warning now that insurgents in Iraq may have obtained nearly 400 tons of missing explosives -- in early 2003?

NBCNEWS Jim Miklaszewski quoted one official: "Recent disagreements between the administration and the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency makes this announcement appear highly political."

http://www.drudgereport.com/nbcw.htm - NBC has not posted the story to the web yet.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#13 Oct 26 2004 at 5:57 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1592761477253

Scholar

188 posts

Quote:

That the NY Times decided to "break a story" about explosives that had been missing for almost a year and a half just weeks before the election.

The administration knew about this **** storm at least two weeks ago, why did they choose not to share this information with the public then? Doesn't conventional wisdom state that if you know bads news is incoming you should break it first in order to save credibility?

This president has never been forthright about any of their obscene blunders. why did this nation and the world have to learn about Abu Graib on network television when the administration had known full well what was happening months and months before?

The media isn't unfairly making the president look bad, his goddamn incompetence is. On the whole the media is covering Bush's *** by glossing over events of historical magnitude by playing up garbage like teen ***** lipsync stories and Mrs Kerry bashing.

Bush could personally set off a nuclear weapon in the middle of San Diego and Gbaji would excuse him, as rocket science isn't really Bush's area of expertise and besides, some incompetent technician should have stopped him from pressing the red button.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#14 Oct 26 2004 at 6:02 AM Rating: Good

bodhisattva

Drama Nerdvana

20,674 posts

Bakkasan did you just quote the Drudge Report? That is pretty Varus-esque of you.

____________________________

Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#15 Oct 26 2004 at 6:31 AM Rating: Good

Nobby

Ministry of Silly Cnuts

19,524 posts

According to the BBC report:

Quote:

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it was told by Iraqi authorities that the explosives were taken after last year's invasion.

The IAEA's remit precludes it from apportioning blame or responsibility, but makes it responsible for identifying security threats to the UN members.

So.

Before Gulf 2:

Iraqi citizens in fear of systematic abuse and torture by Sadamm's Ba'athist henchmen

UN inspectors on the ground had been containing and maintaining security of nuclear and conventional weapons sites for several years.

US and UK Citizens under little or no threat from islamist terror squads in Iraq

18 months later:

Iraqi citizens in fear of air-strikes and abuse from coalition forces, now almost universally seen by Iraqi's as an army of occupation

UN Inspectors pointing out that conventional and potential nuclear armaments are now in the hands of persons unknown

Regular suicide bombing, kidnapping and executions of US & UK citizens in Iraq

Well, at least we got Osama. No, wait.

Why did we do this again?

____________________________

"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#16 Oct 26 2004 at 6:53 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1592791858947

Sage

2,878 posts

bhodisattva Defender of Justice wrote:

Bakkasan did you just quote the Drudge Report? That is pretty Varus-esque of you.

Did you even read it? NBC is reporting it, they just dont have it on the web yet. It was gone on April 10, 2003 when they came to secure the site. So sad that an NBC news crew was with them to prove it huh? So sorry.

Here is a simple timeline:

The International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors last saw the explosives in January 2003 when they took an inventory and placed fresh seals on the bunkers.

An NBCNEWS crew embedded with troops moved in to secure the Al-Qaqaa weapons facility on April 10, 2003, one day after the liberation of Iraq. According to NBCNEWS, the HMX and RDX explosives were already missing when the American troops arrived.

EDIT:
As the rest of the world begins to catch up:
http://www.keralanext.com/news/?id=59076

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/26/iraq.explosives/

Edited, Tue Oct 26 07:58:54 2004 by Bakkasan

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#17 Oct 26 2004 at 8:56 AM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

Quote:

"John Kerry's attacks today were baseless," Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt said. "He said American troops did not secure the explosives, when the explosives were already missing."

I bet a faulty IAEA report of weapons material would have been sufficent grounds to invade Iraq Smiley: wink2

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#18 Oct 26 2004 at 9:48 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1695601009560

Guru

18,463 posts

Quote:

A senior Bush official e-mailed DRUDGE late Monday: "Let me get this straight, are Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards now saying we did not go into Iraq soon enough? We should have invaded and liberated Iraq sooner?"

I was wondering how they would spin this in favor of the Iraq invasion, but man, that's reaching.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#19 Oct 26 2004 at 9:54 AM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

You mean beyond the "See?! You said it was wrong so that means it must have been WMDs or else you wouldn't care!! We found the WMDs!!" response?

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#20 Oct 26 2004 at 10:00 AM Rating: Decent

Smasharoo

Lunatic

30,086 posts

In other words, in all probability, that place was looted before US troops ever got there, much less had any opportunity to secure it. They just only recently got a full accounting of what all was stolen. The lack of guards at the building when the reporters drove by (and provide a nice picture as well!) is almost certainly because there has never been anything there to guard since we occupied the area.

Funny how the story makes it seem like this stuff was stolen just this month while US forces should have been guarding it. Sigh... No liberal slant in media you say?

You know what's funnier? The embedded reporter I just saw on MSNBC who was at the site with 101st airborne commenting on how everyone was "amazed at the massive amount of ordiance" but then they drove on to Baghdad leaving it completely ungaurded.

Funny!

Funny how you make random imaginary shi[b][/b]t up everytime there is a story demonstrating how massively undermanned the US was and is in Iraq.

Funny!

Gbaji: Well, the only thing that really makes the Manhattan Project a story is that the New York Times is just now reporting about a project that ended months ago! I mean they're reporting about some "secret government project in the desert" only AFTER an Atomic bomb is dropped. In all likelyhood it was a cricket game at Los Alamos. Typical liberal slant looking for demons in the shadows.

Actually, scratch that last bit. "Demons in the shadows" is far, far, far, to creative for you.

Heh.

Folks.

Um.

____________________________

Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#21 Oct 26 2004 at 11:40 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1592262426090

View User Forum

Scholar

7,476 posts

Bakkasan wrote:

bhodisattva Defender of Justice wrote:

Bakkasan did you just quote the Drudge Report? That is pretty Varus-esque of you.

Did you even read it? NBC is reporting it, they just dont have it on the web yet. It was gone on April 10, 2003 when they came to secure the site. So sad that an NBC news crew was with them to prove it huh? So sorry.

Here is a simple timeline:

The International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors last saw the explosives in January 2003 when they took an inventory and placed fresh seals on the bunkers.

An NBCNEWS crew embedded with troops moved in to secure the Al-Qaqaa weapons facility on April 10, 2003, one day after the liberation of Iraq. According to NBCNEWS, the HMX and RDX explosives were already missing when the American troops arrived.

EDIT:
As the rest of the world begins to catch up:
http://www.keralanext.com/news/?id=59076

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/26/iraq.explosives/

Edited, Tue Oct 26 07:58:54 2004 by Bakkasan

NBC is the LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!!

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#22 Oct 26 2004 at 12:36 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1592267255777

2 posts

The only true thing we know is that Bush made the dumbest choice in American history and it's time we get his redneck oil loving *** out of there. It's time to get someone in office that will care about the country that elected him, not some country half way across the world that someones father couldn't finish with in the first place.

Cheers for Kerry!!

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#23 Oct 26 2004 at 2:53 PM Rating: Good

trickybeck

Tracer Bullet

12,636 posts

Gbaji, the Times just broke the story now because they didn't know about it until now.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20041025/ts_nm/iraq_explosives_dc_9

Quote:

Prior to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the HMX had been sealed and tagged with the IAEA emblem while stored at Al Qaqaa.

Quote:

Vienna diplomats said the IAEA had cautioned the United States about the danger of the explosives before the war, and after the invasion it specifically told U.S. officials about the need to keep the them secured.

Quote:

IAEA spokeswoman Fleming said ElBaradei informed Washington of the seriousness of the matter on Oct. 15 after learning about the disappearance on Oct. 10.

Quote:

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the IAEA informed the U.S. mission in Vienna on Oct. 15 that the explosives were missing and Bush was told days later.

So obviously the Times couldn't have broken it when even the President didn't know about it.

(Didn't know about the theft, that is. He knew, or at least his staff knew, of the importance of that munitions site.)

Quote:

A Western diplomat close to the IAEA, who declined to be named, said it was hard to understand why the U.S. military had failed to secure the facility despite knowing how sensitive it was.

"This was a very well known site. If you could have picked a few sites that you would have to secure then ... Al Qaqaa would certainly be one of the main ones," the diplomat said.

Edited, Tue Oct 26 15:54:35 2004 by trickybeck

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#24 Oct 26 2004 at 2:56 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1592262426090

View User Forum

Scholar

7,476 posts

You've truly lived up to your sig, Smoker of ********

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#25 Oct 26 2004 at 2:57 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1684109803886

View User Forum

Scholar

12,622 posts

Old news, and the weapons were already gone before troops were able to secure that area. Wow, the media outdid themselves this time reporting old news out of context. I'm sure we'll hear about Abu Ghraib next!

An ABC news crew was with the battalion that made the discovery btw... That crap about the Timesn ot knowing about it is dogshi[/u]t

Edited, Tue Oct 26 16:10:43 2004 by Lefein

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#26 Oct 26 2004 at 4:13 PM Rating: Good

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

Smasharoo wrote:

You know what's funnier? The embedded reporter I just saw on MSNBC who was at the site with 101st airborne commenting on how everyone was "amazed at the massive amount of ordiance" but then they drove on to Baghdad leaving it completely ungaurded.

Odd... Everyone else is saying that the stuff was missing when we got there.

Source? Or did you just make that up?

Look. I know you guys are desperate to throw any **** against the wall that you can, but this is pretty lame. A 5 year old could read that news story and see that despite all the innuendo, the report somehow magically manages to never mention *when* the munitions were stolen. It just says that they were there before the invasion, and 1.5 years later... they're missing!

Don't you think someone maybe looked in the building sometime in the intervening time period? How about finding out basic facts like that *before* going to print with a story? That would seem to be responsible journalism. But that's not what we're getting here. The story was written purely to spread fear and innuendo about the Bush administration right before the election. It's freaking transparent.

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

▲ Page top

Weapons of Moderate Destruction stolenFollow